Tequila Sunrise Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 Just curious to hear if any 2mm fine scale modellers are currently working in 5ft 3in or 5ft 6in gauges. Would either be practicable with Shop Three wheel muffs? I am happy to experiment, but wonder if anyone has current or previous experience to share? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Sykes Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 It's something I've thought about, to the extent of acquiring a set of 10.5mm roller gauges when Phil Copleston was producing them, but it hasn't developed beyond a vague thought so far. A member of the association did do a shot-down version of the 4mm J15 kit; I can't remember who it was off the top of my head but it'll be in the back issues of the 2mm Magazine. When I get time I'll see if I can find it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium nick_bastable Posted January 8, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 8, 2012 If your a member of 2mm Association ask on VAG as I talked with a Irish modeller at the 2010 expo who modelled broad gauge Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share Posted January 8, 2012 Ta for the replies! To be frank, I had already decided I would experiment, whether I was on my own or not. I was just interested to see if anyone else was on common ground. 10.5mm gauge is presumably practicable, as it is listed in 2mm Scale Association standards. I decided to be extremely brave and try 11mm gauge though - hence the title for this topic. I have fancied doing something like this for some time. I am really only feeling my way around to get an idea of the issues at the moment. I adapted some 2FS roller gauges and built a short test track this afternoon/evening. Anyway, as no one else on here seems to be doing the same thing, I won't waste any more of your time. What I am doing is probably totally irrelevant and uninteresting to all other 2mm modellers - and judging by the issues that do come up there is plenty else to occupy your time! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold queensquare Posted January 8, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 8, 2012 I adapted some 2FS roller gauges and built a short test track this afternoon/evening. Anyway, as no one else on here seems to be doing the same thing, I won't waste any more of your time. What I am doing is probably totally irrelevant and uninteresting to all other 2mm modellers - and judging by the issues that do come up there is plenty else to occupy your time! On the contrary, I for one hope you report your progress here, I have no real interest in 5'3" modelling but the results of your experiments would always be interesting and the results almost certainly contain ideas and techniques that would be useful. I don't know of anyone else interested in the North Somerset Light Railway but it won't stop me from reporting progress Jerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Alex Duckworth Posted January 8, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 8, 2012 I'd like to see what you come up with, too. It's all interesting to me, especially something different. I think that I saw some Irish stuff (in N, modern) on the Shapeways 3D rapid prototyping website, maybe worth a look on the 3D special interest section. Alex. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian Smeeton Posted January 9, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 9, 2012 As above, as a nascent 2fs modeller, I would be keen to see what you do, whether the actual subject modelled is in my sphere of interest or not. Best of luck with it, One that I shall watch with interest. Regards Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 9, 2012 Author Share Posted January 9, 2012 OK, I am very happy to report back if people are interested - just to make things clear though I am experimenting with 11mm gauge for 5ft 6in. I am not trying 10.5mm for 5ft 3in (which also applied in parts of Australia, not just Ireland by the way!) - unless 5ft 6in proves to be impractical. There appears to be a bit in common between the various railways in both gauges though, as they all had strong British connections at one time or other, so various manufacturers built similar steam and even a few diesel locos for both. It is just an experiment, so I am not sure how much I can report in the future. I was kind of thinking of something fictitious and colonial - borrowing much from Argentina (which had a very strong British influence), but with Australian influences as well. The recent book on Armstrong Whitworth diesel locomotives provides much inspiration. Whether I get far enough to finish a working locomotive is of course another matter entirely! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richbrummitt Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I can't see why not pushing the wheels in the last 1.5mm wouldn't work with the standard parts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 9, 2012 Author Share Posted January 9, 2012 I can't see why not pushing the wheels in the last 1.5mm wouldn't work with the standard parts. Having just tried it over lunch, I am tempted to agree! The maths made me query it in the first place - the amount of the stub axle gripped in 9.42mm gauge is around 0.79mm more than in 11mm gauge. The gap in the middle of the muff, to isolate the 2 half-axles, is around 0.5-0.75mm. The width of a muff is around 6mm. Therefore the part of the half axle gripped in 9.42mm gauge is around 2.6 or 2.7mm. That means in 11mm gauge, there is just under 2mm gripped. A taper on either the muff hole or the end of the axle will reduce that a bit further. I tried some disc wheels in a bogie muff and the wheels do seem to run true. They certainly don't seem particularly loose. My main concern would be with driving wheels though, where the stresses are likely to be much greater. My feeling at the moment is to drill a small hole in the ends of the axles and glue a short piece of wire or thin tube in to extend the half axle a bit (but at a reduced diameter). Then, I would glue the axles in place with Araldite. That ought to be a very solid job. Having tested the disc wheels, I think there is quite a lot of side play. I have double-checked my dimensions and everything seems correct, compeared with standard 2FS dimensions. I then checked some Farish conversion wheels on some 9.42mm Easitrak and find a similarly large amount of side play. Perhaps I am spoilt by also working in P4? Does everybody use the standard dimensions in 2FS? Whilst I appreciate that the flanges should not be tight on the rails, I kind of feel at the moment that maybe I ought to tighten things up a bit. How does everyone else feel? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Natalie Graham Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 You could always use 1.5mm bore styrene tube and cut it longer than the Association muffs to allow for the wider gauge. You might need to sleeve it to mount gears, or bore out the ones for 1.5mm shafts but on axles without gears it wouldn't matter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
2mm Andy Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Some 2mm modellers use a slightly larger back-to-back dimension of 8.6mm (the standard is 8.5mm). That will reduce the amount of side play a little and apparently improves the running through points. Remember that 2FS standards aren't as close to true scale as P4 - they're more of an EM-type standard. TBH I would build a turnout and have a play with a wagon and loco before you try tightening-up dimensions. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 9, 2012 Author Share Posted January 9, 2012 You could always use 1.5mm bore styrene tube and cut it longer than the Association muffs to allow for the wider gauge. You might need to sleeve it to mount gears, or bore out the ones for 1.5mm shafts but on axles without gears it wouldn't matter. Ta, Natalie - I will bear that in mind as an idea for the future. Some 2mm modellers use a slightly larger back-to-back dimension of 8.6mm (the standard is 8.5mm). That will reduce the amount of side play a little and apparently improves the running through points. Remember that 2FS standards aren't as close to true scale as P4 - they're more of an EM-type standard. TBH I would build a turnout and have a play with a wagon and loco before you try tightening-up dimensions. Andy Andy, I am sure the 2FS standards do work well as laid down and didn't wish to convey an opposite view. I seemed to remember some people talking about tweaking the b/b measurement a bit to improve running - and you have confirmed it. I don't want to make any major changes, other than to the gauge itself, of course - or recklessly pretend that I know better than people with many years experience. As to the proper order to do things, there are so many challenges ahead - which is why I am doing this little experiment in the first place. I am not sure if I have landed myself with a catch-22 situation, a chicken-or-egg-first dilemma or a recipe for a 22 egg omelette! Either way, things will be complicated and probably a little messy. The disc wheels I mentioned earlier will be made up into a track-testing trolley. I will add some check rails to my little test track, to test the back to backs for the short term. Pointwork will have to wait until I have done a little more research, as I want to try something relevant - typical of F/B colonial-style track. Bullhead, or modern British F/B profiles just won't look right. I found some drawings of Victorian Railways 5ft 3in trackwork over the weekend which might work. In theory, I just have to stretch the width slightly in Photoshop to get the gauge I need. As for locos, I am still thinking about what to do first. I doubt if there is any quick and easy route in 11mm gauge. The loco may have to come last!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhys Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 have been following this thread as I have an 'unhealthy' interest in a slightly wider gauge. So far this interest has only been limited to reading and research (as I have far too many other projects on the go currently). However I did go so far as to build a piece of mixed guage track using code 40 flat bottom rail to see what it would look like. I have not added any of the longitudinal beams yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 10, 2012 Author Share Posted January 10, 2012 That looks like an encouraging start, Rhys! It looks like 7ft gauge, which is a different world altogether. I used 18mm sleepers for my 1/2 metre piece of track. Compared with photos from Argentina, they don't look bad. I suspect broader gauge lines did not increase sleeper length in proportion to gauge. When I work out how to put photos on here (I only joined a few days ago, after browsing as a guest for a year or so) I will add a few of the track and gauges I have so far done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 I tried some disc wheels in a bogie muff and the wheels do seem to run true. They certainly don't seem particularly loose. My main concern would be with driving wheels though, where the stresses are likely to be much greater. My feeling at the moment is to drill a small hole in the ends of the axles and glue a short piece of wire or thin tube in to extend the half axle a bit (but at a reduced diameter). Then, I would glue the axles in place with Araldite. That ought to be a very solid job. Having tested the disc wheels, I think there is quite a lot of side play. I have double-checked my dimensions and everything seems correct, compeared with standard 2FS dimensions. I then checked some Farish conversion wheels on some 9.42mm Easitrak and find a similarly large amount of side play. Perhaps I am spoilt by also working in P4? Does everybody use the standard dimensions in 2FS? Whilst I appreciate that the flanges should not be tight on the rails, I kind of feel at the moment that maybe I ought to tighten things up a bit. How does everyone else feel? One key issue with wheels running true in a muff they are not fully pressed home in compared to the design is the wheel diameter. What works with a 7mm wheel might not with a 13mm one. Which is what brought the replacement steam loco wheels for RTR locos project to a halt - we couldn't get them to run true using the same manufacturing method that churns out diesel wheels by the hundreds. OK for a diffferent reason than here, but that is what you should test - assuming you want to model steam locos of course. If it's just diesels then you probably shouldn't worry. Bear in mind as soon as you increase the BtoB significantly you have to start altering other things in the standard, such as the checkrail gaps. I am not talking about the increase from 8.5mm to 8.6mm here, which does work, but going any further has consequences. 2FS is not P4, it must be said (I model in both). I did many years ago convert some 2FS wheels to have narrower flanges and would operate on true-scale pointwork. I did not reduce the flange depth to scale, and am convinced that would never work for various reasons, even if I could build a properly sprung loco. I gave up the experiment when I realised I would not be able to use anyone else's stock on my layout, nor could I take my stock elsewhere to play trains, and also that I would have to turn down umpteen rolling stock wheelsets to my newly-invented standard. If you are modelling to Irish gauge, only the last of these would really be an issue in your case. If you do need new muffs, the man who turns all the Association ones would I imagine be able to quote you a price for a batch made to a different length. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 11, 2012 Author Share Posted January 11, 2012 Ta Chris! The points you have made are extremely useful and very thought-provoking. I had kind of anticipated the problem you raised with larger driving wheels. I had just about convinced myself that I should try a steam loco, or at least a rolling loco chassis, before doing anything else. Your post has reinforced that view. I will bear in mind your idea of ordering wider muffs. Thanks for suggesting it. I was not planning to make a super-standard for my experiment - just tighten the BTB up a little. I now have a new BTB gauge - just a standard Association bobbin-type with a piece of brass bar soldered to it. This gives me a gnat's whisker short of the equivalent of 8.6mm for 9.42mm gauge. Regarding compatibility, I appreciated from the start that I would probably be on my own, but don't see this as a particular problem. The uniqueness of my little project, with its new challenges, is one of the big attractions. We must keep things in their proper perspective though - it is only an experiment. I am quite happy to accept that I might not succeed. The time and money will be small, but well spent, even if problems might ultimately kill off the project altogether. The experience can be used to good effect on whatever I try next, if I really do have to move onto something else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 11, 2012 Author Share Posted January 11, 2012 I just feel a need to clarify one or two issues that have come up. Reading back through recent posts, some views are a little confusing - particularly the assumptions by some that I am modelling Irish railways and that I am trying to severely change 2mm standards! My plan is to try 11mm gauge with existing 2FS wheel standards, representing 5ft 6in gauge, as used in places like Spain, Portugal, India, Pakistan, Ceylon, Chile and Argentina. It is just to try something different to the norm, though I do have a soft spot for railways in exotic places. I am just widening the wheel back-to-back measurement very slightly over the 2FS equivalent. This seems to have already been tried by several people in 9.42mm gauge, with improved running. I won't be altering the wheel profile in any way. Apart from possible problems with wheel muffs being too short and the need to make my own gauges, I can't see any technical problems that don't exist in 2mm scale, but am happy to be corrected. I even see one or two advantages - like the extra width between the frames. The scratch-building aspect of the project is likely to be by far the greatest challenge. I will have to scratch-build just about everything. In reality, this is little different to modelling some of the more obscure British railways using 9.42mm gauge though - except that I will have to scratch-build all the track, which I feel very comfortable about anyway. I don't envisage building much more than a small diorama, at most, with a couple of locos and a few items of stock. Even that is likely to take me quite a while. I see it as a learning exercise for my railway modelling in general - deliberately pushing my skills and knowledge beyond what I have already. After further thought, I think I will go for a rolling steam loco chassis (not motorised) as the next step. This will test the standard wheel muffs with larger wheels, covering Chris Higgs's comments above. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richbrummitt Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Apart from possible problems with wheel muffs being too short and the need to make my own gauges, I can't see any technical problems that don't exist in 2mm scale, but am happy to be corrected. I even see one or two advantages - like the extra width between the frames. Me neither. The extra space will be an advantage - you can potentially fit larger motors! I will have to scratch-build all the track, which I feel very comfortable about anyway. It seems to have been very quickly forgotten that this used to be the case before easitrack, and you still have to do switches and crossings like this anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 My plan is to try 11mm gauge with existing 2FS wheel standards, representing 5ft 6in gauge, as used in places like Spain, Portugal, India, Pakistan, Ceylon, Chile and Argentina. It is just to try something different to the norm, though I do have a soft spot for railways in exotic places. If you are starting from a blank canvas, you might at least want to think about using 1:160 instead of 1:152 as a scale. You might if exteremely lucky find some American prototypes that were exported to the above countries. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 It seems to have been very quickly forgotten that this used to be the case before easitrack, and you still have to do switches and crossings like this anyway. Quickly forgotten, as was the horse as a means of transportation once you could buy motor cars. The new was just so much easier than the old. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 11, 2012 Author Share Posted January 11, 2012 If you are starting from a blank canvas, you might at least want to think about using 1:160 instead of 1:152 as a scale. You might if exteremely lucky find some American prototypes that were exported to the above countries. Chris Ta - I did have that thought too, but it's swings and roundabouts really. For example, the EE Class 20 export version went to several countries and Alco FA bodies (in American N) scale up nicely (with a bit of cut and shut on the nose and body detail) to 2mm scale Alco "World" series exported to several 5ft 6in gauge systems. Japanese models are 1:150 and can be used to some extent too. In fact some old-style Kato coaches are almost perfect for my needs. Also, working to 2mm to 1 foot scale is easier on the brain than 1:160. Much stock was built by British and American manufacturers, so the dimensions work out in round feet and inches, if you convert the rather odd-looking metric dimensions quoted on drawings. I am likely to use UK-style signalling and road vehicles. In the end, it seemed more advantageous to use 2mm scale, really. Of course, when I have built a model of one of the Spanish Kitson-Meyer 2-8-0 + 0-8-0 articulated locomotives, or an Argentinian Beyer Garrett in 2mm scale, I can enter it in the 2mm AGM loco competition, whereas 1:160 models would not qualify, I imagine (dream on!) Just to add, I don't see using RTR an advantage, in general, for this project. One reason for trying it is to get away from the potential addiction to boxshifters and E-bay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Sunrise Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 Hopefully my first photos on RMweb.... I put a bit of Easitrak alongside my 11mm track for comparison. The really good news is that larger wheels do run with bogie muffs on 11mm gauge track without any perceptible wobble - at least to my eye. The wheels are a little loose though, in that they need little persuasion to slide in and out. I will need to glue them in place when I do a permanent fix in proper driving wheel muffs. I very much appreciate Chris raising this as a possible issue - proving it works has increased my confidence no end. So, apart from the minor problem of having to scratch-build everything, which I don't underestimate, the project does seem quite feasible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted January 13, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 13, 2012 In the early days of the 2mm association there was very little available and scratch building was the norm and could include building your own motor. I see no reason why you shouldn't succeed provided you are up for a challenge and can accept that progress may be a little slow. The extra space between the frames will be an advantage in fitting gears and pickups etc. If you have a sufficiently accurate lathe you could turn and bore out your own muffs if you wanted. Eperience will show wether it would be necessary. For the small diorama type of layout you mention I would not imagine any difficulties. However if you wanted 100 wagon freights on a big roundy roundy the strain on the wheels might be more of an issue. Now that you have sorted a track gauge etc you may as well continue with 2mm at 1:152. However if someone wanted to use 1:160 they should look at the work of Henk Oversloot in N fine. So far as I know anything built to those standards would be acceptable in 2mm SA competitions. There was a very nice Bulldog built to run on N gauge trackwork at the last AGM. One thing I can promise is that the association members would welcome and encourage you. Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 In the early days of the 2mm association there was very little available and scratch building was the norm and could include building your own motor. Yes, but there were not many of them doing it! One of the aims of 2mm product development over the last few years has been to try and make the basic things you need to model in 2mm FS easier, and hopefully thereby increase the number participating. Easitrac, replacement diesel wheels, etched wagon underframes and so on. We actually had an interesting AGM 7-8 years back where a couple of members complained we were producing too many replacement wagon underframes, and so making 2mm modelling 'too easy' and hence destroying the inherent challenge which was their motivation in choosing the scale. You cannot please everyone all of the time. The witty repost of 'model Indian railways then if you want a challenge' did not occur to me at the tiime! So I think making your own wheels and motors in this day and age starts to border on the masochistic. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.